|
PRESENT: | ||
|
Mayor Williams Councilmember Clay Councilmember Robinson Councilmember Seamens Councilmember Snipper Councilmember Victoria Councilmember Wright |
City Manager Matthews City Clerk Carpenter Deputy City Manager Ludlow Police Chief Ricucci City Planner Lam Affordable Housing Manager Walker | |
Mr. Wright announced that he would be holding a candidate forum at his house, sponsored by the Old Town Residents’ Association.
Mr. Seamens thanked the Takoma Voice for hosting the candidate forum on October 25.
Mr. Seamens asked if the City could go after the commercial signs pasted on the utility poles with irremovable glue.
Ms. Matthews said that staff would pursue the issue through the property maintenance code.
Ms. Clay commented that Costa Mesa, California, had an anti-flyering ordinance that allowed the City to bill for cleanup of the flyers. She also suggested negotiating a memorandum of understanding with Pepco regarding placement of official signs on the light poles.
Mr. Williams said he had been hearing about 911 calls being directed to Prince Georges County (from land lines in parts of Takoma Park that were formerly in Prince George’s County).
Ms. Ludlow said that anyone who has the problem should contact the City with the affected phone number.
Chief Ricucci commented that an issue does remain with cell phone calls in the City. He encouraged people to call 301-270-1100 to reach the Takoma Park police dispatch directly. For fire or ambulance, callers should use 911.
Ms. Clay suggested having stickers printed with the information since it is a recurring issue.
FOR THE RECORD
Mayor Williams noted for the record a Proclamation Commending the Takoma Park Lions Club on its 80th Anniversary (attached).
Pat Loveless, 7620 Maple Avenue, commented on the election and encouraged people to vote.
Charles Thomas, member of the Public Safety Citizens Advisory Committee, commented on the status of the Committee. He suggested a temporary suspension to allow the Council time to review the mission and structure. Mr. Thomas withdrew his application for reappointment to the Committee.
David Borden, PSCAC member, commented that some of the problems that occurred with the Committee were the result of different visions of the Committee’s broad focus. He supported a more focused mission and policy for the Committee.
Chief Ricucci provided an update on the status of recent crimes in the city. He indicated that the police would be out in force during Halloween.
Cathy Plevy, Police PIO, described a new anonymous cell phone tip program being initiated by the Police Department.
Ms. Lam commented on the resolution, drafted based upon Council's comments at the worksession discussion. She explained that the resolution recommends and supports the CR Zones with certain conditions.
After discussion, Council agreed to amend the proposed resolution to recommend allowing car rental facilities in the zone by special exception.
Motion to adopt Resolution 2009-67 Commenting on Zoning Text Amendment 09-08 (Commercial/Residential (CR) Zones) Moved by Councilmember Clay, seconded by Councilmember Wright. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Councilmember Clay, Councilmember Seamens, Councilmember Snipper, Councilmember Victoria, and Councilmember Wright; ABSTAIN: Councilmember Robinson)
Resolution 2009-67 (attached)
Motion to adopt Second Reading Ordinance 2009-53 Appointing Judges for the November 3, 2009 City Election. Moved by Councilmember Snipper, seconded by Councilmember Wright. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Councilmember Clay, Councilmember Robinson, Councilmember Seamens, Councilmember Snipper, Councilmember Victoria, and Councilmember Wright)
Second Reading Ordinance 2009-53 (attached)
(3A) Resolution 2009-68 Recognizing Municipal Government Works Month (attached)
(3C) Resolution 2009-69 in Support of Superintendent Weast’s Recommendation on School Boundary Changes (attached)
Motion to adopt the consent agenda. Moved by Councilmember Clay, seconded by Councilmember Wright. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Councilmember Clay, Councilmember Robinson, Councilmember Seamens, Councilmember Snipper, Councilmember Victoria, and Councilmember Wright)
Ms. Clay requested that the item be pulled from the consent agenda. She commented that the original agreement was that the Co-op would pay 100% of the fee so long as the available parking spaces numbered 10-16. She said there was not a need to reduce the payment since the parking was within the range.
Mr. Wright agreed.
Mr. Williams noted the value of the storage area provided by the license agreement.
Council asked if the City was still paying the note on the purchase of the lot.
Ms. Matthews responded that the note had been paid off.
Motion to adopt Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Land License Agreement with TPSS Co-op. Moved by Councilmember Clay, seconded by Councilmember Robinson. (VOTING FOR: None.; AGAINST: Mayor Williams, Councilmember Clay, Councilmember Robinson, Councilmember Seamens, Councilmember Snipper, Councilmember Victoria, and Councilmember Wright)
Linda Walker explained the request from MHP, to continue the PILOT property tax abatement at 50% for as long as the property remains as affordable housing in order to meet the financing requirements imposed by Citibank.
The Council discussed the request. There was not support for extending it as proposed. Councilmembers suggested alternatives: to restart the PILOT at the current date; renegotiating the loan from Citibank; or setting the abatement at 50% for 15 years instead of the graduated 10-year agreement.
Councilmember Snipper noted that the project would continue to revitalize the rental property on Flower Avenue by setting a standard. He and Mr. Robinson commented on the high cost of the planned renovation.
Ms. Ruderman, from MHP, said that the buildings had been through neglect. She said that since MHP was a long term owner, it would gut the building for the renovation. She said they would be keeping anything that works.
Staff was directed to come back to Council with a revised ordinance.
Representatives from Toole Design Group presented the results of the ADA and Sidewalk Studies. They provided a rating system for sidewalks and lists showing the ratings for each sidewalk segment.
Ms. Clay noted priorities in her ward and areas where residents really want sidewalks. She said the criteria do not end up in a final product that reflects what is important for people in her ward.
Ms. Ludlow indicated that there would be the opportunity to continue to adjust the plan.
The consultants commented that there is a role for human input in how the community looks at the priorities for a given block.
Mr. Snipper commented that is useful to have external validation, by selecting a set of streets that should come up high, low, and middle, and then seeing where they fell in the analysis.
Mr. Seamens asked if traffic was considered.
The consultant said the analysis did not include traffic or the kind of vehicles on a street.
Mr. Wright asked about the cost factor for ongoing sidewalk maintenance. The consultants said they would check to see if that information was available.
Mr. Wright and Mr. Williams asked about sidewalks along state highways and if they were included.
The consultants said they did not include those in the scoring process. They had the sidewalk information in their database, but not at the same level of detail. They said they could look into incorporating them in the existing conditions report.
Ms. Ludlow provided information on the draft resident survey. She noted that the survey was similar to the one conducted two years ago. The proposed survey included questions about how people would like to hear information, included questions proposed by the Emergency Preparedness Committee and the Washington Adventist Hospital Land Use Committee, and asked a question related to the current economic downturn to assess whether people would support increased taxes to maintain certain services or would support service reductions.
Chief Ricucci commented on the value of the survey for his department.
Ms. Ludlow noted that the survey was not meant to be a program evaluation tool, but rather a perception/opinion tool. She said it was considered a best practice in municipal government to survey residents.
Ms. Victoria commented that an eight-page survey was an overwhelming respondent burden.
Mr. Seamens expressed concern about the survey being done so close to the 2010 Census.
Mr. Wright asked what would be saved if the City decided not to do the survey. He said it was important to reassess when money is to be spent.
Ms. Matthews explained that the City had already contracted to pay the hard costs for the survey; additionally, costs had been incurred by time spent consulting with NRC staff.
Ms. Clay noted that the Council had already voted to proceed with the survey.
Ms. Matthews explained that a question had been included in the survey to get at what is the tolerance level in reducing certain service areas.
Ms. Clay commented that this type of question was asking people to decide when they do not have the full picture or understand the implications.
Councilmembers were asked to e-mail staff with additional comments or suggestions within the next few days.
Council discussed whether to suspend the PSCAC indefinitely. The Council concluded it would prefer to form a task force to study issues when needed.
Staff was directed to draft an amendment to the City Code to remove the PSCAC as a standing committee.
Ms. Matthews presented her report (attached).
ADJOURN
The Council adjourned for the evening at 10:55 p.m.